Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 17 La. App. 605 - Green v. Frederick

17 La. App. 605 - Green v. Frederick’s Empirical Analysis

1931

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
1
states following
November 1973
most recently cited

17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently November 1973

17 state decisions

6019311940195019601970decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on James v. St. Charles Hotel Co. · Nicholls v. Maddox · State ex rel. Illinois Central Railroad v. Judges of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals · State ex rel. Dixon v. Judge of the Fifth District Court · 23 La. Ann. 483 - Hernandez v. James

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Under article 543, C.P., all judgments must be read in open court. It is obvious that this judgment was not read in compliance with the sacramental requirements of that article. Article 543, C.P., was amended by Act 267 of 1916, p. 554, which permits district judges to render, read, and sign judgments in open court in any parish in their district to be forwarded to the clerk of the court where the case originated. This judgment was rendered in chambers without any indication even as to the parish in which it was rendered. Evidently, it was not .read, rendered, or signed in open court, as required by Act 267 of 1916. As there was no agreement between counsel or the litigants authorizing the rendition of the judgment in chambers, it had no legal effect, and is a nullity. State ex rel. Illinois Central R. R. Co. v. Judges of Court of Appeals, 48 La.Ann. 905 , 19 So. 932 . “The rendering of a judgment in chambers without authorization, the court in the above-cited case assimilates it to a judgment rendered in vacation or out of term time which the court held void in Culver v. Leovy, 21 La.Ann. 306 ; Hernandez v. James, 23 La.Ann. 483 ; State ex rel. Dixon v. Judge of Fifth District Court, 26 La.Ann. 119 ; Succession of Bougere, 29 La.Ann. 378 ; and Laurent v. Beelman, 30 La.Ann. 363 ; cited in State ex rel. Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. Judges of Court of Appeals, 48 La.Ann. 905 , 19 So. 932”.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““All judgments must be rendered, read and signed by the judge in open court * * *”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.